This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
This whole debate between Elon and the rest of the right hinges upon what people understand the purpose of a state to be.
Is it an ideological organization like the Comintern, the Ummah or Christendom (or e/acc aerospace/digital foom)? Is it a commercial area, devoted to making the green line go up? Alternately, is the state a suit of political power-armour for a nation, devoted to advancing their national, ethnic interests?
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1871978282289082585
Elon is in with the neocons, the fundamentalists and the woke on this one, he lacks a national concept for the state.
At the end of the day, I believe in the nation-state as the fundamental unit. Blood is thicker than ideology, you can see Chinese recruitment officers (who somehow got into the US military) say on Tiktok 'obviously I'm not going to fight against China' - maybe some other wars. Relying on foreign talent leaves you wide open to treachery and manipulation as the US has experienced and is experiencing. And it corrodes the necessary spirit of sacrifice. People are happy fighting wars to defend their nation, they are not so keen fighting for abstract causes. If migrants make a logical decision to migrate to a richer, more lucrative economic zone, they'll likely make the logical decision to leave when the going gets tough. On a collective level, logical individual decisions are no good. It makes more sense to evade duty and responsibility - but then you end up living in a poor, unsafe and weak state, you're worse off than before.
The US has mostly avoided these problems because the going never got tough. They were bigger and better than everyone in their region and enjoyed allies who did most of the hard fighting in the big wars. Even then, there have been significant political problems in America due to a lack of ethnic homogeneity. There can't be any race riots if there's only one race present.
Nobody wants to join the British Army today. Despite constant fearmongering and war propaganda it's actively shrinking. Turning a nation-state into an economic zone corrodes its integrity.
I don't see why we can't allow for the existence of states founded on different principles, whether they be nation-states, empires, theocracies, multiethnic city-states, or transhumanist online network states. Let Europe reassert the primacy of blood and soil if they have the stomach for it. Let Arabs or Turks reform the Caliphate if they can. Let wealthy elites carve out little Singapores of their own in Africa and Latin America. And let America be the un-nation whose tradition is to oppose tradition. If one of these forms is so much better than the others then the choice between them will be as obvious in the end as the choice between East and West Berlin. Online nationalists may say it's already so as they rush to post comparisons of downtown SF and some medieval village in Germany, but the smartest and most ambitious Europeans are still flocking to the former, so I would say the outcome is still uncertain.
As for Chinese immigrants specifically, I'll just point out that one notable Cold War blunder was the FBI's mistreatment and detention of Qian Xuesen under false allegations of being a communist agent, which led to his actual defection and establishment of the Chinese rocketry and ballistic missile program. It has also always baffled me that Iran hasn't been able to build nuclear weapons, despite the fact that I've met enough brilliant Iranian graduate students that I could probably put together a nuclear program of my own. The answer as near as I can tell is, apart from Israeli and American sabotage, that all the Iranians smart enough to build an atomic bomb simply hate the government and would rather live literally anywhere else. Sending such people back home to be drafted or tortured into making WMDs would be a massive self-own.
It's a bad idea to send talented people off to rival countries, I agree 100%. But don't you see the pernicious problem that emerges? You end up in a situation where you can't be sure of people's loyalties. Or worse still, you end up manipulated into harming your own interests. McCarthyism didn't emerge from thin air, it emerged from the US leaking nuclear and technical secrets like a colander, from Soviet spy rings basically running key parts of the US government for several years. It was a great blessing of the US that they were facing a smaller, poorer opponent with an economic system that didn't work.
Harry White caused insane, ludicrous amounts of damage to US interests. He sabotaged US aid to Nationalist China in WW2, he helped outline the Morgenthau plan that so greatly stiffened the German war effort in 1945, he handed over lots of secret documents to the Soviets. Just one traitor in high office can do immense damage and there were a bunch of them, check out the Venona intercepts.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link